“Good Luck Fixing the Problem”: Small Low-Income Community Participation in Collaborative Groundwater Governance and Implications for Drinking Water Source Protection

Society and Natural Resources, Routledge | June 10th, 2020

There is increasing interest in the potential of source water protection to address chronic challenges with small systems and rural drinking water provision. Such a plann

There is increasing interest in the potential of source water protection to address chronic challenges with small systems and rural drinking water provision. Such a planning and management approach to increasing safe drinking water access, however, will likely require leveraging multi-stakeholder collaborative governance venues to this effect. This paper investigates the prospects of doing so using the case of California’s groundwater reform process known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act or SGMA. Interviews with drinking water stakeholders from small low-income communities in the San Joaquin Valley show how existing power and resource disparities limit the prospects of integrating rural drinking water priorities into regional planning. Long-term, more fundamental changes will be needed to meaningfully transform water management in this direction. Short-term state intervention is needed to protect equity and public good goals, raising potential contradictions between devolved water management and improved drinking water access that need to be addressed.

2019 Annual Compliance Report California Drinking Water Program

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | May 1st, 2020

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) Division of Drinking Water (DDW) is the primacy agency responsible for the administration and enforc

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) Division of Drinking Water (DDW) is the primacy agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements in California. The State Water Board has adopted statutes and regulations to implement the requirements of the SDWA. The State Water Boards’ regulatory responsibility over public water systems includes (1) issuance of operating permits, (2) conducting inspections and sanitary surveys, (3) monitoring for compliance with regulations, and (4) taking enforcement action to compel compliance when violations are identified. Throughout the year and as part of DDW’s regulatory oversight responsibilities, Drinking Water Program staff from DDW’s 24 District offices and 30 County health departments (delegated by the State Water Board to undertake regulatory oversight on behalf of DDW) document and record violations incurred by public water systems. Enforcement actions are issued by the Drinking Water Program to address these violations. The data is compiled and submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) on a quarterly basis. This report presents an accounting of the violations record for the calendar year 2019. USEPA requires states to issue this Annual Compliance Report by July 1st of each year and make the report available to the public.

2021 Drinking Water Needs Assessment

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | April 9th, 2021

In 2016, the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) adopted a Human Right to Water Resolution making the Human Right to Water (HR2W), as defin

In 2016, the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) adopted a Human Right to Water Resolution making the Human Right to Water (HR2W), as defined in Assembly Bill 685, a primary consideration and priority across all of the state and regional boards’ programs. The HR2W recognizes that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking and sanitary purposes.”  In 2019, to advance the goals of the HR2W, California passed Senate Bill 200 (SB 200), which enabled the State Water Board to establish the Safe and Affordable Funding for Equity and Resilience (SAFER) Program. SB 200 established a set of tools, funding sources, and regulatory authorities that the State Water Board harnesses through the SAFER Program to help struggling water systems sustainably and affordably provide safe drinking water.  The annual Drinking Water Needs Assessment (Needs Assessment) required to be carried out by the SAFER Program provides foundational information and recommendations to guide this work. The Needs Assessment is comprised of Risk Assessment, Affordability Assessment, and Cost Assessment components. Development of the Needs Assessment consisted of stages between September 2019 and March 2021, each of which were detailed in publicly-available white papers and presented at public webinars. The public feedback was incorporated into the final methodology and results. 

70 analyte PFAS test method highlights need for expanded testing of PFAS in drinking water

Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier) | April 12th, 2023

n this community-led pilot study we sought to investigate the utility of expanded per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) testing for drinking water, using a targeted

n this community-led pilot study we sought to investigate the utility of expanded per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) testing for drinking water, using a targeted analysis for 70 PFAS and the Total Oxidizable Precursor (TOP) Assay which can indicate the presence of precursor PFAS. PFAS were detected in 30 out of 44 drinking water samples across 16 states; 15 samples would exceed US EPA's proposed maximum contaminant levels for six PFAS. Twenty-six unique PFAS were identified, including 12 not covered by either US EPA Methods 537.1 or 533. An ultrashort chain PFAS, PFPrA, had the highest frequency of detection, occurring in 24 of 30 samples. It was also the PFAS reported at the highest concentration in 15 of these samples. We created a data filter to model how these samples would be reported under the upcoming fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR5) requirements. All of the 30 samples with PFAS quantified by the 70 PFAS test had one or more PFAS present that would not be captured if the UCMR5 reporting requirements were followed. Our analysis suggests the upcoming UCMR5 will likely underreport PFAS in drinking water, due to limited coverage and higher minimum reporting limits. Results were inconclusive on the utility of the TOP Assay for monitoring drinking water. The results from this study provide important information to community participants regarding their current PFAS drinking water exposure. In addition, these results suggest gaps that need to be addressed by regulatory and scientific communities, in particular, the need for expanded targeted analysis of PFAS, the development of a sensitive, broad spectrum PFAS test, and further investigation into ultrashort chain PFAS.

A changing framework for urban water systems

American Chemical Society (ACS) | May 8th, 2013

Urban water infrastructure and the institutions responsible for its management have gradually evolved over the past two centuries. Today, they are under increas

Urban water infrastructure and the institutions responsible for its management have gradually evolved over the past two centuries. Today, they are under increasing stress as water scarcity and a growing recognition of the importance of factors other than the cost of service provision are forcing a reexamination of long-held ideas. Research and development that supports new technological approaches and more effective management strategies are needed to ensure that the emerging framework for urban water systems will meet future societal needs

A Survey of Efforts to Achieve Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California

Pacific Institute | April 12th, 2018

In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 64/292, which declared that “the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation [is] a human r

In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 64/292, which declared that “the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation [is] a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights.” Two years later, the California Legislature added section 106.3 to the California Water Code (Section 106.3), which declared that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” Although the formulation of the human right to water (HRTW) for sanitary purposes in Section 106.3 is not as explicit as the UN resolution, it is also true that the availability of safe and clean drinking water presupposes the sanitary disposal of human waste. Accordingly, the statute has served as the touchstone for California drinking water and sanitation efforts. Since 2012, California government agencies and non-governmental stakeholders have focused most of their efforts on drinking water. These efforts, while commendable, have been incomplete. First, the need for drinking water access and quality continues to outstrip capacity and resources. Second, while sanitation requires an adequate supply of water, it also requires an array of public and private infrastructure and services for the hygienic disposal of human waste, including household-level infrastructure like a toilet or septic tank. This paper will focus on needs, efforts, and recommendations to advance the right to water for drinking and sanitary purposes. First, we summarize the legislative efforts that set the foundation for the adoption of HRTW in California. Second, we discuss the challenges facing residents of disadvantaged unincorporated communities, particularly in light of California’s recent drought, to illustrate the drinking water and sanitation needs of these communities. Third, we review the state’s implementation of Section 106.3 and efforts by non-governmental stakeholders to advance HRTW, focusing on the need to invest in programs and funds to address the right to water for sanitary purposes. Last, we provide recommendations to tackle the existing and ongoing needs related to sanitation, with a focus on household-level infrastructure.

Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water Technical Report 1: Project and Technical Report Outline

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 2nd, 2012

Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water Technical Report 2: Nitrogen Sources and Loading to Groundwater

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 2nd, 2012

Nitrate loading to groundwater in the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley is widespread and chronic, and is overwhelmingly the result of crop and animal agricultural ac

Nitrate loading to groundwater in the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley is widespread and chronic, and is overwhelmingly the result of crop and animal agricultural activities. Urban wastewater, septic systems, and other sources may have significant localized impact. Due to long transit times, the impact on groundwater resources is a legacy for years and decades to come.

Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water Technical Report 3: Nitrogen Source Reduction to Protect Groundwater Quality

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 2nd, 2012

Although reduction of anthropogenic loading of nitrate to groundwater aquifers will not reduce contamination in the short term (due to long travel times), reduction effo

Although reduction of anthropogenic loading of nitrate to groundwater aquifers will not reduce contamination in the short term (due to long travel times), reduction efforts are a critical component of any long term solution to the problem of high nitrate in drinking water. Technologies are available for reducing the transfer of nitrate to groundwater from surface sources. Such technologies involve (1) reducing the amount of nitrogen (N) discharged or applied to the land and (2) controlling the amount of water applied to land which serves as the carrier of nitrate. Many of these source control methods require changes in land management and upgrading of infrastructure.

Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water Technical Report 4: Groundwater Nitrate Occurrence

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 2nd, 2012

This report reviews the hydrogeology and groundwater quality in the Tulare Lake Basin (TLB) and Salinas Valley (SV). We also assembled groundwater quality data from near

This report reviews the hydrogeology and groundwater quality in the Tulare Lake Basin (TLB) and Salinas Valley (SV). We also assembled groundwater quality data from nearly two dozen local, state, and federal agencies and other sources into a dataset, here referred to as the (Central) California Ambient Spatio-Temporal Information on Nitrate in Groundwater (CASTING) dataset. The dataset combines nitrate concentrations from 16,709 individual samples taken at 1,890 wells in the Salinas Valley (SV) and from 83,375 individual samples taken at 17,205 wells in the Tulare Lake Basin (TLB) collected from the 1940s to 2011, accounting for a total of 100,084 samples from 19,095 wells. Almost 70% of these samples were collected from 2000 to 2010; only 15% of the samples were collected prior to 1990. Half of all wells sampled had no recorded samples prior to 2000.